Over the past few weeks, California lawmakers have been moving forward with the strongest net neutrality protections bill on record. At every step, big telecoms have spent hours and tons of money pressuring lawmakers to take the teeth out of SB 822. On Wednesday, the telecoms got their wish. In a press release from Sen. Scott Weiner’s office, the Democrat voiced his anger over what he called “outrageous” amendments applied by the state’s Assembly.
“What happened today was outrageous. After the Senate passed SB 822, with strong net neutrality protections, the Assembly committee forced hostile amendments into the bill before even holding a hearing, before taking any public comment, and only 12 hours after making those amendments public. These hostile amendments eviscerate the bill and leave us with a net neutrality bill in name only. In negotiations leading up to the committee hearing, I expressed a willingness to negotiate the provisions of the bills - and I remain willing to negotiate - but I can’t support a weak version of net neutrality that eliminates critical provisions. I’m proud to stand with a broad coalition of labor, media, anti-poverty, social justice, consumer, and business organizations, as well as elected leaders, including Senator Kevin de Leon, in fighting for net neutrality. California should lead by example and enact the strongest net neutrality protections in the country. Passing a weak, neutered bill is exactly the wrong direction for our state.”
Arstechnica reports that the newly amended bill eliminates a a variety of bans that would have limited the backdoor options that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon use to create information hierarchies.
But one amendment eliminated a ban on ISPs demanding payments from websites or online services "in exchange for access to the Internet service provider's end users." The ban on blocking or throttling would seem to prevent an ISP from demanding payments for mere access to its network. But eliminating the ban on access payments could make it easier for ISPs to find a way around the anti-blocking and anti-throttling rules.
Another amendment approved yesterday removed a provision that would prevent ISPs from charging online services for zero-rating, which exempts Internet content from data caps. Many net neutrality supporters say that ISPs impose data caps in order to create an artificial scarcity that is then "solved" by websites or online services paying the ISP to circumvent the caps.
As of now, AT&T has already begun rolling out their “not fast lane” fast lanes, where they throttle data … for a price. While it’s not “internet fast lanes” in the most obvious sense, the results are the same and their affects on the consumer will be very bleak. The bill was approved by the Assembly, chaired by Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles) with a vote 8-2 with seven Democrats voting for the bill and two Republicans voting against the bill. If the bill had not passed it would be scuttled entirely; so the bill as it exists right now is more in line with the Obama-era net neutrality protections, and less powerful than what it was just two days ago. The positive here is that the bill now moves onto the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection, which can reinstate the original teeth that these lawmakers just pulled.